But honestly the math seems wrong. I have for Romania -40 pts as they played Faka'osilea 3 times 2017 and 5 times 2018. Spain played Belie 5 times in 2017 and 4 times in 2018. Belgium I cannot say, as I do not know, which players were involved. But one has to exclude the occasions, the players played against Georgia (Faka'osilea 2 times, Belie once). Thus Roania -30 points and Spain -40. I don't know the allocation for Belgium but for the WC Rankings it is -30 pts.

So we have for the final World Cup Qual. standing (if everything holds):1. Russia 10+11=212. Germany 8+0=83. Romania 15-10+14-20=-14. Spain 13-20+13-20=-145. Belgium 2-15+9-15=-19

Alcyon wrote:I am always amazed to see people blame the governing body when they failed to do their job. This is asking for more hand holding, nothing else.

Check evil santa's post, what the federations have to check if written there, nothing more and nothing less. Belgium's case is easy, I don't know which box they ticked but the players lied. Romania's case is simple too.

Spain's case is a bit less simple, but when you recruit 13 french players, you better have to check if they played for the next senior fifteen representative team. They failed. Of course it will be easier for the FA's if WR keeps a database, they can drop some responsabilities to the governing body. It would also be easier if your boss did your job or if my students tried to learn by themselves when they aren't at school.

If you want the sport to have credibility with it eligibility rules then you’re damn right the governing body has to take its share of the blame. We’re talking about a situation where it took 2 months to figure out exactly who did what. A simple data base would not only have prevented this incident taking place, it would have meant any eligibility breaches would have been figure out immediately and dealt with swiftly, instead of this circus that we’ve had to wait through. It not about hand holding, it’s about being smart.

I will make a challenge with money PRIZE. Who will send info about T1&T2 ineligibility cases in the last 4 years. It should be very fun to find out some T1 players with problems in the last World Cup for example.

Last edited by RugbyLiebe on Wed, 16 May 2018, 15:31, edited 1 time in total.

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Alcyon wrote:I am always amazed to see people blame the governing body when they failed to do their job. This is asking for more hand holding, nothing else.

Check evil santa's post, what the federations have to check if written there, nothing more and nothing less. Belgium's case is easy, I don't know which box they ticked but the players lied. Romania's case is simple too.

Spain's case is a bit less simple, but when you recruit 13 french players, you better have to check if they played for the next senior fifteen representative team. They failed. Of course it will be easier for the FA's if WR keeps a database, they can drop some responsabilities to the governing body. It would also be easier if your boss did your job or if my students tried to learn by themselves when they aren't at school.

If you want the sport to have credibility with it eligibility rules then you’re damn right the governing body has to take its share of the blame. We’re talking about a situation where it took 2 months to figure out exactly who did what. A simple data base would not only have prevented this incident taking place, it would have meant any eligibility breaches would have been figure out immediately and dealt with swiftly, instead of this circus that we’ve had to wait through. It not about hand holding, it’s about being smart.

I think it is the Unions' fault, but I absolutely second trg here. This is also a wasted opportunity. Rugby is extremely bad in everything about stats. This could also change a thing or two.

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Might be a busy year in European Grand Prix Series 2019. How was Toby Flood doing this season? (Ah wait checked his case, they write he's qualified through his grandfather and helds a German passport. Problem is, that his grandfather was born in a region of Germany, which is now part of Poland, so he is not eligible).

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Bogdan_DC wrote:I will make a challenge with money PRIZE. Who will send info about T1&T2 ineligibility cases in the last 4 years. It should be very fun to find out some T1 players with problems in the last World Cup for example.

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

You mean the one U20 game for Wales in 2009 against France U20, a year in which France A was the NSRT? Well apparently the DRV did their homework Cost me 3 minutes to google what you meant.

Still I think it is ridiculous that it matters against who you play if you play for the NSRT. The biggest joke about the rules in my opinion. If you play for the NSRT, that's it.

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Sorry, but you seem to not understand this. They simply wrote down all the players who didn't qualify on being born in the country they play for. End of story. No agenda.

I mean they even state this "The Lelos have been traditionally entirely home-grown – and still are – though a mild exemption is given to Merab Sharikadze, born in Moscow to Georgian parents who returned to Tbilisi shortly after."

Bit of a chip on your shoulder, mate?

How to grow rugby worldwide?Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

RugbyLiebe wrote:Might be a busy year in European Grand Prix Series 2019. How was Toby Flood doing this season? (Ah wait checked his case, they write he's qualified through his grandfather and helds a German passport. Problem is, that his grandfather was born in a region of Germany, which is now part of Poland, so he is not eligible).

That can't be right. Borders change all the time, if his grandfather was born in "Germany" it shouldn't matter which state controlls the territory now.

RugbyLiebe wrote:Might be a busy year in European Grand Prix Series 2019. How was Toby Flood doing this season? (Ah wait checked his case, they write he's qualified through his grandfather and helds a German passport. Problem is, that his grandfather was born in a region of Germany, which is now part of Poland, so he is not eligible).

That can't be right. Borders change all the time, if his grandfather was born in "Germany" it shouldn't matter which state controlls the territory now.

Of course it isn’t right (for the legal reason behind this, see Art. 116 GG).

Just want to point out that the FIFA World Cup has also been plagued by nations fielding ineligible players in qualifying and having results overturned. There was one World Cup, can't remember right now, that had six or seven African countries caught fielding ineligible players. Database does not necessarily resolve all issues.

Fake passports, fake ancestry or any sort of fraud in obtaining the eligibility is not solved by any database or online system.

But of course the Romania and Spain cases would be solved by a database. Everything related to players playing for other national teams or players in suspension period is easily solved.

About unsufficent residency time, it would only be solved if World Rugby provides a global management system for every single Union run its club rugby using the same system (for me it is perfectly possible... an extension of the World Rugby Passport system to provide match sheets of all Regional and National Unions-run competitions).

antlat wrote:Just want to point out that the FIFA World Cup has also been plagued by nations fielding ineligible players in qualifying and having results overturned. There was one World Cup, can't remember right now, that had six or seven African countries caught fielding ineligible players. Database does not necessarily resolve all issues.

I used to be involved in eligibility checking for a tier one nation. It is a real minefield. Those demanding and expecting a full WR database of captured players to resolve the issues are perhaps a bit naive on a lot of what has gone on previously. I have seen several players look to play for a higher level nation, on a better (higher value) contract, using a variation of the name they used when they made their international debut. They were likely aware they were ineligible, but the onus of proof was on the country considering selecting them. Sometimes it is a nickname, but sometimes it is an anglicised name v a birth-name. This issue is endemic in the sport I work in now - with lots of Asian players moving to English or French speaking countries. So, I would expect that players capped early for a tier 2 or lower tier nation might be a bit economical in providing full information to a new employer in a new country. A club might me more likely to sign them on if they show a commitment to staying long-term and qualifying for their new home country on residency.

So, I wonder how a clerical assistant can be expected to definitively check all possible name variations in a player database. Dates of birth might help - but not enough I feel.

What was quite apparent is that countries with a budget to do all the checks were able to find loopholes or make enquiries for rulings, prior to selection. The thing that created the mess was the precedents that were set in defining what signified capture for the nominated second team and sevens. It became all about who they took the field against as opposition. There were lots more 'A' selections in those days, so it was tricky for anyone to be certain. There were also precedents based on the player being a minor at first representation. There were 16 and 17 years olds playing sevens. So, the clerical assistant might need legal experience to accurately interpret precedent, and overlay that with the rules in place at the time.

The other issues arose when players were chosen to play a match or tournament that would have captured eligibility, and their naming was published online. Sometimes players withdrew at the last minute - maybe aware of the 'capture'. But, the internet team listings after the match or tournament did not always recognise this. So, if a database is used, it really has to record appearances on the field, and not be a 'squad submission'.

Because of these complications, all a country can do is flag potential issues, and then check a player's passport for evidence of travelling to 'capture' matches and events. You can look at the ESPN Stats Guru database and the World Rugby pdf listings of International Sevens players, but it will never be fully definitive.

Perhaps the use of the 'next best' selection for capture needs to be scrapped, or have mandatory reporting requirements into a database everyone can see. But, I think the most important thing is for WR to set a limitation time for any protests or investigations to be lodged; perhaps just 2 or 3 weeks after play. I have seen many questionable dual national representations, that have likely not been investigated, over the past 20 years. Heaven forbid if some of these are unearthed for an appeal process!